defy the report. that's one to watch. also we talked at the top of the hour about the huge market sell off friday and today. friday 666 points off the dow. today almost 1200 >> i just learned there is such a thing as dow futures. that's how concerned i am with the stock market. good to know. and i just learned that steve bannon is once again delaying his cooperation, if we can call it cooperation. i'm not sure what you call it at this point. >> nbc news hasn't confirmed that he's not going to appear. we heard from the horse's mouth, mike conway, who's sort of the acting chair on russia matters

that there has been a subpoena. there's something going on here that is i think hard to dismiss as a coincidence in terms of bannon being requested to speak to mueller, his lawyer saying he'll be happy to cooperate, and him showing up at house intel, and this fake debate that we don't understand. >> he has no choice when it comes to mueller. we know mueller can force him to speak to their investigation, whether it be a grand jury or more cooperatively. the game played with the committee is interesting. and one wonders is the special counsel in any way involved in these delays? is this something that the special counsel actually wants? >> it would not be unusual for a special counsel or special prosecutor to want to make sure that that -- the counsel's inquiry, the criminal inquiry got first crack before it can be

consumed by congress or leaked to people in the white house. we don't have any direct information that mueller has stopped the testimony from going forward but there's this weird dynamic where steve bannon's lawyer is also the russia lawyer for don mcgahn, the white house counsel on russia issues. so it's a weird dynamic. again i think this will all eventually come clean we'll figure it out somewhere down the road but we don't know. >> thank you, rachel. >> thanks, lawrence. >> well, tonight everyone, and now i really mean everyone, around donald trump believes that if he agrees to an interview with the special prosecutor he will absolutely commit a crime right in front of the prosecutors during that interview. we know that all of his supporters on tv believe that

the president is incapable of telling the truth and will definitely commit the crime of perjury. >> the president couldn't possibly know what bob mueller knows about the case. this is what we call a perjury trap. >> under no circumstances should he grant mr. mueller an interview. it's a suicide mission. >> i don't want to testify because as a lawyer, i don't want him caught in a got you moment where someone accuses him of lying where he may not remember something. >> even if mueller is not setting it up as a perjury trap it still is one. >> tonight the "new york times" is reporting that donald trump's lawyers also believe that he will definitely commit a crime if he speaks to the special prosecutor's investigators. his lawyers are concerned that the president who has a history of making false statements and contradicting himself could be

charged with lying to investigators. that is why the lead of the "new york times" breaking story tonight is lawyers for president trump have advised him against sitting down for a wide-ranging interview with the special counsel, robert mueller iii, according to four people briefed on the matter, raising the specter of a month's long court battle over whether the president must answer questions under oath. the times reports indicate that some of the trump lawyers believe that, quote, mr. mueller lacks the legal standing to question mr. trump about some of the matters he is investigating, like the president's role in providing a misleading response last summer to a "new york times" story about a meeting mr. trump's son, donald trump jr., had with russians offering dirt on hillary clinton. the advisers also argued that on other mat ers, like the allegations that the president

asked james comey to end the investigation into the national security advisor michael t. flynn, the president acted within his constitutional authority and cannot be questioned about acts that were legal. joining us now harry lipman, now a professor at the university of california san diego. and nick ackerman, an assist tenant special watergate prosecutor. and natasha bertrand, staff writer at the atlantic. harry lipman, i want to go to what leads like a novel legal theory, that as a "new york times" reports, the president's lawyers are thinking that mr. mueller lacks the legal standing to question mr. trump about some of the matters that he is investigating, like the president's role in providing misleading response to the "new york times" and even the

president's role in talking to james comey about the flynn case. >> well, novel is one word for it. i think a better word would be muddled and meritless. they seem to be confused between potential defenses that they could offer and the potential right or in this case obligation to answer questions in the first place. it's straightforward that somebody has to answer questions. there's a special case about the president that i'm sure we'll get to. but they're completely confused in thinking that just because they might have some valid claim on the merits that that somehow might mean mueller could seek and require their questioning. it's just muddled on their part. >> what is that special case about the president that you were just referring to, harry? >> i think everyone is assuming that a subpoena against the president to testify would

surely succeed. and i think it would succeed, but it's -- there's a credible case that trump's lawyers could bring because no sitting president ever has been compelled to testify. it didn't happen with clinton, he did it voluntarily. and his lawyers wanted him to fight it at the time. so i think trump's lawyers could calculate that they can gain a few months in doing this. on the other hand, of course, a few months from now we're much closer to a potential democratic takeover of the house of representatives, potentially even the senate. so there's that downside for him. but it's not a straightforward proposition that he would lose, though i think he would. >> nick, i think most believe that you established in the watergate case with president nixon, when the president was ordered to turn over the tapes by unanimous decision of the united states supreme court, that that was the same thing as

ordering a president to testify. is that the way most people see that case? >> i think that's the way it should be read and would be read. they quote from a grand jury decision where they say specifically that the public has a right to every man's evidence. there is no way this president is going to avoid a subpoena and he's going to wind up before a grand jury of 23 people in the district of columbia where he's going to have to testify under oath with his lawyers waiting outside the jury room if he wants to come out and ask him questions. >> what do you make of what we're reading in the times about the president's criminal defense lawyers believing that the scope of the questioning can be limited to exclude any questions about participating in responses to the "new york times" article last year or any questions about what he said to james comey about michael flynn. >> there's no way.

all of those relate to very specific criminal acts that mueller is investigating, whether it's obstruction of justice with respect to the comey situation or whether it has to do with why he was trying to get the fbi to stop its investigation into flynn. the grand jury and the prosecutors before the grand jury have a wide ranging, almost unlimited, area they can question witnesses about. and there is no way, no how, those lawyers are ever going to be able to limit the questioning before the grand jury. >> natasha bertrand here we have the president's lawyers, four sources in the "new york times" telling the "new york times" what the president's criminal lawyer, john dowd, is thinking about this. saying that he doesn't want to cooperate in any kind of cooperative discussion with the special prosecutor. this seems to indicate now that these lawyers, as the "new york times" is reporting, believe that the president can't get

through that without saying something that is not true. >> there's a precedent for that. i believe that the last deposition that trump was subjected to, when he was trying to sue the journalist tim o'brien he lied more than 30 times in that deposition alone. so now it's a matter of the lawyers kind of needing to control trump's bravado because in the past trump has said bring it on. i would be happy to be interviewed by mueller, including under oath and that was a pledge that took his lawyers by surprise because saying you would be willing to testify under oath means you would appear before a grand jury. so trump has gone overboard with how excited he seems to clear his own name. and he told aides that he would be able to exonerate himself in an interview with mueller. when nixon didn't release the tapes and deied a subpoena to do so he underestimated the extent

that damaged him politically. if trump were to refuse an interview with mueller, it could damage him as well. >> nick, let me go through this procedurally. we can presume since the lawyers have been negotiating with the special prosecutor since december about the interview, what they're negotiating is this stuff that appeared in the "new york times," meaning no questions about the "new york times," no questions about comey's -- his discussion with comey about flynn. clearing the special prosecutor is not agreeing to that and that's why we have tonight's story. that leaves the special prosecutor with the choice of subpoenaing the president to testify to a grand jury, as you just referenced, assuming he turns down the interview. now, let's then assume the president does not defy that subpoena, let's assume he fight it is subpoena in court or whatever, but eventually is ordered to testify to the grand jury.

take us to that scenario, because now there's no lawyer present, the lawyer is not allowed in the grand jury room. the president at any time as a witness can leave the grand jury room to go ask his lawyer a question about what's happening in there, but it's a much more cumbersome thing to handle that way. and it's at that point that you believe that there would be virtually no limitations of the scope of the question? >> there would be no need to. if they're going to agree to something -- look, fw e if there's certain things they want to question trump about and one of those primary is what kind of conversations he had with michael flynn. don't forget michael flynn is the elephant in the room here because he is cooperating, he's laying out all the criminal conversations he's had with donald trump and that's going to be the first area that they're going to question him about. because they've got documents backing up flynn. they've got e-mails backing him up. they've looked at computers. and donald trump doesn't have a clue what all of those things

are. so the odds are that's what they want first. but forgetting that, he's going to wind up in the grand jury like anybody else, he's going to be advised of his rights and he's going to be told if at any point he so desires he has the right to request and be permitted to go out and speak to his attorneys. but that's it. he's before a citizen group of 23 people in the district of columbia and he's going to have to answer questions from the special counsel and from the grand jurors. >> harry lipman, let's look forward on this. here's the president's lawyers saying do not agree to the cooperative version of this, which is the interview. let's assume somewhere down the road there comes a subpoena for a grand jury. clearly these lawyers will try to battle that subpoena in court and that's what the "new york times" report is indicating tonight is one of their strategies. that will -- that process will drag on for what months just to

get to a point of a resolution on does this president have to respond to this grand jury subpoena. what kind of timetable would you put on a legal fight over that? >> i would say, you're right, it would be expedited but it will be about three or four months, i would say. i do think then a couple points were he to lose, which i'm not as ve hemt as nick but i think it's likely in the end he would lose. i don't think we'll see him in a grand jury room. i think there will be some allowance made for his office and as with clinton, it will be in the oval office with a certain kind of allowance made for who he is. but the big thing is, we've been banding about for months this idea of constitutional crisis. i don't think we've arrived there yet. but we can really see it now in the scenario you lay out, lawrence.

because unlike, nixon, clinton, who had some understanding of the institutiona obligations, trump is the mad man, he's trying to somehow make a mess of the lawful subpoena order. and if he does resist, that is the definition of a constitutional crisis. will he actually sit down if ordered to -- it's less certain of him than any president we've ever had. >> natasha, the two other presidents we've sneen this kind of situation, bill clinton and richard nixon were in their second terms. they had no possibility of running for reelection but still they cared very much about the politics of it, how it would affect their party, they cared very much about their own standing with the american people. donald trump doesn't care, obviously, about any of that.

he has not spent one minute as president trying to reach out to new voters, he has done nothing put speak to the people who have already voted for him and not yet abandoned him. so i don't see what the dynamics are that would force donald trump to behave the way presidents before him have behaved. >> i think trump has made it very clear that what he cares about the most is appealing to his base. that's what drives him, his base of core voters. whether or not that's enough to carry him into the next election remains to be seen but it's also a reason the democrats are worried he may block the release of the rebuttal to the nunes memo. and the same goes for a potential interview with mueller. i think a lot of trump's strength -- or his strength with his base lies in the fact that he isn't afraid to tell the truth and speak out.

that may be a reason he's trying hard to get an audience with mueller and why his lawyers are really recommending that he not sit down with them. >> natasha, harry, and nick thank you all for joining us tonight. coming up in the rewrite tonight, treason and donald trump. next we ask a congressman about his reaction to the president accusing him of treason today. [drip. drip.]

need a change of scenery? kayak searches hundreds of travel and hotel sites so you can be confident you're getting the perfect hotel at the best price. soak it in. kayak. search one and done.

the house intelligence committee voted unanimously tonight to release a memo written by the democratic staff of the committee which covers the same territory as the now discredited memo written by the republican staff of the committee released on friday. the president now has five days on deciding to approve the release of the democratic memo. a week ago when the democrats voted to release their memo, the chairman of the committee, devin nunes then promised in the closed door meeting of the committee that he would support the release of the democrat memo. the chairman and republicans opposed the release of the democratic memo at the same time as the republicans because they said the memo was not submitted early enough to be voted on at the same time as the republican memo. here's what the ranking democrat adam shift told chris hays tonight.

>> they tried to say they were taking this step of the house process in transparency. when asked if they wanted to be trance parent why are you not releasing the democratic response there was no answer. >> joining us now democratic jerry nadler from new york, also with us tim winer, award winning author. congressman nadler, your reaction to the committee's vote tonight to release the democratic memo? >> i'm glad they did. i think they were forced to do it by public reaction and the fact that the republican nunes memo has been subject to such ridicule and reputation and the fact that people like trey gowdy

were knowing the republicans didn't do what they said it would do. i hope the president will allow it to see the light of day. >> let's listen to devin nunes this morning on fox and friends talking about this memo. >> do you have five more memos? >> yes, let me get to that. phase one of our investigation was getting to -- getting at the fisa abuse. what we're looking at now is the state department and irregularities there. phase two we will follow the facts where they lead. when we get enough facts we'll figure out a way to let the american people know. >> tim, the memos will keep coming. >> if devin nunes is determined to go down in history as a mini-joe mccarthy they'll keep coming. but he'll only be remembered as

someone who not only damaged but destroyed a 40-year tradition how the committee operates. >> there was also something shocking, something he said about george papadopoulos. let's listen to that. we have that ready, too. >> if george papadopoulos was such a major figure why didn't you get a warrant on him? if papadopoulos was such a major figure, as far as we can tell he lied. and as far as we can tell papadopoulos never met with the president. getting drunk in london and talking to diplomats saying you don't like hillary clinton, i think it's scary that our intelligence agency would use that against an american citizen. >> that might be the most stunning display of ignorance by a chairman of a committee. let's put up the photograph.

this is a photograph everyone has seen. devin nunes apparently doesn't remember it. congressman nadler it's stunning to me that a chairman of a committee could be that ill-informed about the very basics of what he's working on. >> well, ill-informed or deliberately misleading. devin nunes has a history of being misleading. the memo he wrote, which was touting as bringing the entire investigation around cloud of suspicion had nothing to do with the investigation. it had to do with one fisa warrant and misstated the facts of that. >> let's look at this tweet that the president did this morning attacking adam schiff, and i guess we don't have the president's tweet, but we have adam schiff's response to it. the president attacked adam schiff to n a tweet to which he

responded mr. president i see you have a busy morning of executive time instead of tweeting false smears, the american people would appreciate it if you turned off the tv and helped solve the funding crisis, protected the dreamers or really anything. >> the president was calling him little adam schiff in this tweet. tim winer, again, this is a kind of interaction that we've never seen in a situation like this. this is the head of the executive branch, who is supposed to have a concern with how intelligence is gathered, maintained, classified or declassified and to him it seems to be a twitter game. >> he's not the first president to abuse intelligence or misuse it. he is the first president who doesn't know what intelligence is or does. the first to savagely attack the cia, fbi. it's his agencies. he's in charge of them. they're supposed to serve him.

but from day one he has attacked the way this government works. and in particular, the intelligence community. they don't like being called fascists or nazi's. he will continue to attack them and in the end he will lose. >> congressman nadler your committee has oversight jurisdiction over the fbi and here's the president just accusing the leadership of the fbi -- i'm not -- it's not clear exactly what he means by the leadership of the fbi, how many people is that? but he's accusing them of something way worse than incompetence but being just outright politically biassed and their actions are based on political bias. >> well, he is trying to distract and discredit. to distract attention from the russia investigation and to discredit whatever mueller says in the end.

and to do that he's trashing the fbi, the justice department -- his own department of justice. he's attacking the cia, all the institutions of government we depend on for security and justice. they will be hurt but he doesn't care about that. all he cares about is there's evidence that the mueller investigation is closing in on him, that it's finding real evidence that his campaign was conspireing with the russians to subvert a democratic election in the united states. he wants to discredit all of those institutions so when mueller releases his report he can say mueller is bias, the department of justice is bias. it's to distract attention from what's going on and to discredit and subvert legitimate functions of investigations. >> congressman, i have to give you a minute of personal privilege here as they would say in the house about something the president said today when he

became the first president in history to accuse the other side in congress as being guilty of treason. he actually accused you personally and all of the democrats in congress as being treasonous because of the way you reacted to the state of the union address. let's listen to had. >> you have the other side, even on positive news, really positive news like that, they were like death. and un-american. un-american. somebody said treasonous. i mean, yeah i guess why not. can we call that treason? why not. >> congressman nadler, your reaction? >> that shows how ignorant and reckless he is to use the phrase treason. it's defined by levying war against the united states and giving aid. i know mr. bannon accused his

son and son-in-law of treason for meeting with the russians and get trying to get dirt on hillary clinton. he called that treasonous, i think it comes close. but the fact of the matter is what was he calling treasonous here? the fact the democrats didn't get up and cheer him when he thought they ought to be cheered. his comments remind me of joe mccarthy. they are ignorant and reckless and frankly disgusting. >> thank you both for joining us tonight. >> thank you. coming up, paul ryan sends the tweet and deletes the tweet and then the deleted tweets raises $150,000 for paul ryan's campaign opponent. that's next. you were made to move. to progress. to not just accept what you see, but imagine something new. at invisalign®,

we use the most advanced teeth straightening technology to help you find the next amazing version of yourself. it's time to unleash your secret weapon. it's there, right under your nose. get to your best smile up to 50% faster. visit invisalign.com to get started today. when it comes to travel, i sweat the details. late checkout... ...down-alternative pillows... ...and of course, price. tripadvisor helps you book a... ...hotel without breaking a sweat. because we now instantly... ...search over 200 booking sites ...to find you the lowest price... ...on the hotel you want. don't sweat your booking.

tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. olay regenerist shatters the competition. hydrating skin better than prestige creams costing over $100, $200, and even $400. for skin that looks younger than it should. fact check this ad in good housekeeping. olay regenerist. ageless. what can a president [ do in thirty seconds? he can fire an fbi director who won't pledge his loyalty. he can order the deportation of a million immigrant children. he can threaten an unstable dictator armed with nuclear weapons. he can go into a rage and enter the nuclear launch codes. how bad does it have to get before congress does something?

the stock market had its single biggest drop in history today when it dropped 1175 points that was after what seemed like a huge drop on friday of 666 points. and no president in history has ever talked about the stock market more than donald trump. until now. the president has taken credit for every up tick in the stock market every day of his presidency but today in ohio giving a speech about the wonderful benefits of his tax cuts he did not say a word about the stock market that was tanking all day. instead he accused democrats in congress of treason and worried that trump voters might be so tired of winning that they just

might stay home and take a nap instead of voting in the upcoming midterm elections. >> you see the big tax cuts you see what we're doing, jobs are coming back. and the people that voted for us become complacent, they're happy. they don't get out and vote. they maybe go to a movie. none of you are going to a movie? so they take it for granted, sit back and get clobbered because the other people are desperate and have more energy. trump message today don't go to the movies in november. paul ryan was forced to remove a tweet that he had to remove. a secret at a public high school in lancaster, pennsylvania said he was pleasantly surprised her

pay went up $1.50 a week. she said that will more than cover her costco membership for the year. some democrats compared that $1.50 raise for a public school secret to the 500,000, paul ryan got from the koch or the $11 million donald trump will save under his own tax bill at least. democrat randy bryce, who's running for paul ryan's seat said moments ago paul ryan deleted this tweet after we told him just how out of touch he was. show paul ryan what you think of his tax bill. chip in $1.50 now to help us repeal and replace paul ryan this november. and his spokesperson said they raised more than $150,000 in 48 hours from that tweet.

so, is paul ryan on his way to being the first republican speaker of the house who will be defeated in his reelection campaign for his house seat or does paul ryan see a wave coming and will he decide not to even run for reelection. that's next. liberty mutual stood with me when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. liberty did what? yeah, with liberty mutual all i needed to do to get an estimate was snap a photo of the damage and voila! voila! i wish my insurance company had that...

wait! hold it... hold it boys... there's supposed to be three of you... where's your brother? where's your brother? hey, where's charlie? charlie?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. on the only bed that adjusts on both sides to your ideal comfort your sleep number setting. and snoring?

does your bed do that? right now during the ultimate sleep number event, our queen c2 mattress with adjustable comfort on both sides is only $699, save $200. ends soon. visit sleepnumber.com for a store near you. (avo) if yand constipation,ling and you're overwhelmed by everything you've tried-- all those laxatives, daily probiotics, endless fiber-- it could be wearing on you. tell your doctor what you've tried, and how long you've been at it. linzess works differently

from laxatives. linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. it can help relieve your belly pain and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements that are easier to pass. do not give linzess to children less than six and it should not be given to children six to less than eighteen. it may harm them. don't take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach-area pain and swelling. ask your doctor if 90 days of linzess may be right for you. we're joined now by the president of the center for american progress and charlie sykess.

charlie, you're joining us tonight from wisconsin and what is going on with paul ryan? he had to delete that tweet, his opponent, randy bryce said he raised about $150,000 from it. and paul ryan i noticed refuses to publically say whether he will or will not run for reelection to his own seat? >> this was an uncharacteristic blunder on the part of paul ryan. they have been pushing the tax cut. i get e-mails from the ryan office i would say multiple times a day, every time a company hands out a bonus on this. for the republicans, the center of their appeal is this tax cut and the stock market. and then what does ryan do? he puts out the ultimate self-own on this highlighting $1.50 a week at the point where the democrats are saying that it

is just crumbs. so this is -- this has been a bad week for ryan, he was embarrassed by the nunes memo, he's obviously mba braced by the tweet, which under mines every talking point they had. is ryan going to run for reelection, i think the odds are yes. the smart money would be he's running for reelection and then announcing he's leaving the house afterwards because he's too potent a fund-raiser not to mention the speaker of the party bailing in the middle of the election. >> he runs for reelection in this theory of the case? >> yes. >> he wins his seat and then he announces i'm leaving the house? >> this is speculative. >> okay. >> i will tell you the people i talked to in washington, which is the scenario they think is the most likely. >> so neera, he clearly, even in

this scenario is finished with his career in the house. but i get charley's point, it would seem untenable that paul ryan could ask his members to walk the plank as it were on some of these votes, especially the health care vote and then not run for reelection himself and bear the heat on that, especially when facing a well financed democratic challenge. >> he's a well financed democratic challenge because of mistakes paul ryan has made like the one over the weekend. i want to pick up on something charley said it's not just the tweet that perfectly encapsulated the democratic argument against the tax bill, which was this tax plan that gave $1.4 billion to the koch brothers who then gave a $500,000 check to paul ryan's pac is literally less than $100

for a working family. i just note the woman at the heart of this stated today how much she was angry that so many other people are getting so much more than a person like her. so i'd say that was an important issue. but also the fact that speaker ryan ran -- supported this devin nunes fiasco and basically put the -- you know, sort of reputation of the house intelligence committee, the reputation of the house to basically run cover for donald trump. all the people that thought of paul ryan as a person of integrity and honesty have been really disappointed by his behavior over the past week to engage in this partisan attack of our law enforcement, the fbi, to help donald trump. >> a lot of indicators of problems for republicans in the election in november.

there's the president talking about don't go to the movies on election day, don't get complacent we're going to need you on election day. this seems to be where they are now, that they are even asking the president to go out there and try to get voters excited now about november. >> sure. well, they have to do that. i will say this. that this messaging on the tax cut, the messaging on the strong economy, i think had been working for the republicans in recent weeks. you see the uptick in the poles for the republicans, even donald trump has seen a modest increase in his popularity, even though he's historically unpopular. that's why the events of the last 48 hours are so significant. it's a major speed bump to have a correction in the stock market for -- you know, during a presidency which he has camp pained on this over and over. i can't emphasize enough how

often republicans will cite these numbers how they are relying on the tax cut to incite the base. that's why the tweet by paul ryan because along with the stock market crash, it might blunt the momentum they've been counting on and enjoying. >> the president can't take credit for the stock market every day and not bear some of it for it go down. and the asia markets, hong kong and tokyo, look like a drop there similar to what we saw here in new york today. so tomorrow could be another really rough, rough day in the stock market for both people in the market and the president. >> yeah if you live by the s&p index or the dow jones, you're

going to die by it. there's a reason presidents don't traditionally champion the stock market rise day after day because something like this could happen. it could be a correction, but i note washington produced information today which is stunning, which is the deficit will be a trillion dollars this year because of the tax cut. so i'd also say for republicans who've been lecturing us about fiscal responsibility they threw that out the window with this debate. >> i want to leave the stock market discussion with the tweet by john harwood, at cnbc covers financial matters. he said the increase in the dow jones industrial average from president's inauguration day to february 5th of the following year, trump 22.7, obama 38.5.

put that in the little known facts. thank you both for joining us tonight. appreciate it. coming up what is donald trump most worried about with the special prosecutor? is it that he expects the special prosecutor to charge him with treason? in the rewrite what donald trump doesn't know about treason. thank you so much. thank you! so we're a go? yes! we got a yes! what does that mean for purchasing? purchase.

let's do this. got it. book the flights! hai! si! si! ya! ya! ya! what does that mean for us? we can get stuff. what's it mean for shipping? ship the goods. you're a go! you got the green light. that means go! oh, yeah. start saying yes to your company's best ideas. we're gonna hit our launch date! (scream) thank you! goodbye! we help all types of businesses with money, tools and know-how to get business done. american express open.

to get business done. burned me up and down, shno way to cool it. ♪ ♪ ♪ every time you kiss me it's like sunshine and whiskey ♪ applebee's handcrafted burgers. any burger just $7.99. now that's eatin good in the neighborhood. it's 6 am. 40 million americans are waking up to a gillette shave. and at our factory in boston, more than a thousand workers are starting their day building on over a hundred years of heritage, craftsmanship and innovation. today we're bringing you america's number one shave at lower prices every day. putting money back in the pockets of millions of americans. as one of those workers, i'm proud to bring you gillette quality for less, because nobody can beat the men and women of gillette. gillette - the best a man can get.

in the rewrite tonight,

freezen. we begin with donald trump lying about freezen today. >> you're up there. you've got half the room going crazy wild. they loved everything. they want to do something great for our country. >> hold on a second. i just -- i have to interrupt here before the president's lie about treason to point out the lie that he just told. it is a small lie by trump standards, but it would be a huge lie for any other president. during his state of the union, half the room was not going wild, they loved everything. the republican side of the republican was applauding in the traditional way that republicans applaud a republican president's state of the union address. they were not going crazy. not one person in that room went totally crazy, but there is plenty of reason to suspect that the man at the microphone that night is sometimes, anyway,

close to totally crazy. now let's listen to his big lie about the other half of the room. >> and you have the other side even on positive news, really positive news like that, we were like death and un-american. un-american. somebody said treasonous. i mean, i guess why not. can we call that treason? why not? i mean, they certainly didn't seem to love our country very much. >> why not? here is what the president who has never read the constitution and could not read the constitution if he tried does not know about treason. first of all, treason has nothing to do with loving the country by which the president means, of course, the government. you can hate america. you can hate the american government. you can hate the president of the united states.

you can hate any government official in the country and that is not treason. it is certainly not treason for members of congress to not applaud when the president says something. in every state of the union address, half of the congress spends most of their time applauding and the other half spends most of their time refusing to applaud, and no president in history has ever been so ignorant or reckless or demented as to call that treasonous, until today. president obama did not call this treasonous. >> the reforms i'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. >> you lie. >> that's not true. >> donald trump did not call that moment treasonous. he had no problem with a republican yelling you lie at the president of the united states. no problem at all. and that may have been ugly.

you might think that was ugly what you saw with the president, president obama, and it was, but it was not treasonous. you can throw a shoe at the president during the state of the union address and not commit treason. it is actually impossible to commit treason against the government of the united states today. because we do not have a specified enemy in a declared war. the constitution specifies, quote, treason against the united states shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies giving them aid and comfort. the supreme court has interpreted that to mean that it is only possible to commit treason during a war that is authorized by a congressional declaration of war. the last time the united states fought a declared war, declared by congress, was world war ii.

and that is why the last time an american was charged with and convicted of treason was world war ii. because donald trump doesn't know any of this. he might well be living in fear that special prosecuter robert mueller will charge him with treason. so donald trump may have begun a campaign today to rewrite the meaning of treason so reduce it to something nonsensical to accuse the other side of treason so he can rally his side in treason. he accused the opposing party in congress of treason. the only members of congress who were actually guilty of treason were the members of congress from the southern states who chose to side with their states when they seceded from the union

and went to war against the united states of america in the civil war. the action of those members of congress fit precisely the definition of treason. but donald trump stands in perpetual reverence to every statue that has taken its place in the south to honor all of those men who committed that treason against the united states of america. and so it is another day of shame for donald trump who is unfortunately incapable of feeling shame but it is also another day of shame for everyone in the trump family and it is another day of shame for everyone working for donald trump, none of whom have the courage or the decency to denounce the words of the only president who has accused congress of treason, the only president who does not know what the word treason means. oh, that's lovely...

so graceful. the corkscrew spin, flawless... ...his signature move, the flying dutchman. poetry in motion. and there it is, the "baby bird". breathtaking. a sumo wrestler figure skating? surprising. what's not surprising? how much money heather saved by switching to geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.

he's a nascar champion who's she's a world-class swimmer who's stared down the best in her sport. but for both of them, the most challenging opponent was... pe blood clots in my lung. it was really scary. a dvt in my leg. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. my doctor and i choose xarelto® xarelto®... to help keep me protected. xarelto® is a latest-generation blood thinner... ...that's proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt and pe blood clots from happening again.

in clinical studies, almost 98% of patients on xarelto® did not experience another dvt or pe. here's how xarelto works. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least six blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective... ...targeting just one critical factor, interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor as this may increase risk of blood clots. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures and before starting xarelto® about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems. you've got to learn all you can... ...to help protect yourself from dvt and pe blood clots. talk to your doctor about xarelto®.

there's more to know. the 11th hour with brian williams starts now. "the 11th hour" with brian williams starts now. the breaks news we're covering tonight comes from "the new york times." what donald trump's legal team thinks about their client sitting down for an interview with mueller. the times reporter on the story joins us live. also as trump spoke about the economy today and declared america open for business, the cable networks cut away to cover the largest single point drop in the history of the market. and the president says the democrats who sat silently and didn't applaud his speech are un-american and suggest they might be guilty of treason. all of it as "the 11th hour" gets under way on a monday night. good evening once again. as we start a new week from nbc news headquarters in new york, day 382 of the trump administration, a day when the stock market took a massive and